I find these interesting too:

http://www.trek-tech.com/products/trekpods.html

I use one of these.  It is a useable walking stick but I replaced the magnetic ball head camera mount with a Manfroto pistol grip ball head with quick release (322RC2).  The magnet was not strong enough for my D300.  It is a little clumsy to use but the Manfroto grip can be adjusted for left handed shooters.  That sold me.

c h e e r s
fred

Quote from: Fred on September 06, 2010, 16:54

If you had an image with a registered copyright put up like that on Flickr I would think you could sue Yahoo for something.  Maybe some lawyer would take it on contingency.

fred

No. There is no way any lawyer is taking such a case on contingency.

If you do find one, send them my way, I can make him/her rich because I have found many places that sell my stuff and my contingency lawyer tried but never achieved anything. The infringing party knows that nothing is going to happen unless this is going into litigation which is costly. I did register copyright btw.

Contingency lawyers want to settle out of court and don't offer a lot of help (that's my experience, yours may differ).

If you have some bad a$$ lawyer that you have to pay for, it may be possible to get some money back when the case goes to court but otherwise there is barely any monetary damage done (that a judge could award) if you find your stuff on Flickr.

Well, I thought the point of registering the copyright was to allow you to sue for more than monetary damages.  Obviously nobody is going to sue if all you can get back is $0.25 or even $28.

fred

Good find - thanks for posting it here.

Some images were already removed due to copyright infringement.

Please contact any copyright owner you might recognize to get these Flickr account holders removed.

Please also check this site: http://www.axehd.com/image/index.php

Sheeeeeeeeeesh!  How many copyright violations do you have to have on Flickr  before they close your account!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/impactvisual/sets/72157619873604208/

He/She has two already!

fred

Well as long as the politicians can keep us focused on this kind of nonsense they can do whatever they want.

fred

That's what IP is all about, you don't pay you can't display. The law already censors what you can see, for example you're not allowed to read an in copyrighted novel on Hero Turko. If he chooses to display it his site should be taken down.
Your viewing is already censored in any-case like with child pornography, it's against the law, you host it you get shut down and hopefully caught and prosecuted too.
His host should already have pulled the site as it's almost certainly against his terms to redistribute stolen IP. Withdrawing his URL is just a far more reliable way of doing it.
You break the law then action is taken. It's not a freedom of speech issue.
Rapidshare etc. should be held responsible for all the content they host too. True it would mean their business model would no longer be supportable, but tough sh*t, you fence stolen property you should be held responsible. It would be time to think up a new model that doesn't involve the theft of other people's hard work!

Nope. I am not talking about legality I am talking about enforcement.   Some kind of "de-registration" power given to enforcement authorities  for copyright abuse is over the line as far as I am concerned.  It should be enforced but not through measures that are easily abused by the powers that be.  Matters of public safety - child abuse, etc. are entirely different from copyright abuse and to my mind it would be too easy to stretch such enforcement power to cover censorship of materials necessary for an informed public.

I suppose what I am saying is it is "more complicated" than just pulling material off the web for copyright abuse.

Calling copyright abuse "theft" is inflammatory and not accurate.  Theft involves depriving the owner of the use of the stolen property.  Copyright abuse does not strictly fit this description.  I am not saying it is right - it is certainly illegal and immoral - but it is not "theft".

fred

I don't think I want to trust anyone to pull registry entries for websites.  That is too much like a bunch of cops telling me what I can connect to/read.   The power is there an probably utilized but it must be minimized if we are going to have democracy.

fred

It's much too soon to know how July will shape up.  We're in the middle of a holiday weekend in the US, which likely depressed sales starting on Friday the 2nd and won't let up until Tuesday the 6th.  Besides, what benefit will you get from not uploading?  Shutterstock's my best earner month after month, and I never make a dime from images I don't submit.  So I just keep submitting and hope things improve.  It's either that or find some new obsession.

Hey don't discourage him!  If he wants to take a little time off why should we mind.

Have a nice vacation sobm -- see you in September.

c h e e r s
fred

He/She seems to want more information than he/she is willing to share.  Why no link to his/her IS port?  Without knowing what kind of stuff is there you can't make much of a recommendation (maybe it is all images/illustrations/vectors of oil spills or Afghanistan!)  Looks like fishing without a license to me.

fred

Quote from: borg on June 02, 2010, 08:08

Is this a sadomasochistic ritual, or you simply forget quickly....?

"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen." (Wittgenstein).

Yes and "He who forgets history is doomed to repeat it."  Santayana (paraphrased).

fred

The business card is still in my list. 

So much to do, so little time!   

Yeah, I have been trying to figure out if it is worth the time.  Wasted a lot of effort uploading to a couple of agencies recently.  Would like to avoid that in future!

c h e e r s
fred

Your best bet might be to approach a few of the big agencies with the idea of them buying the collection and treating/promoting it as their "in-house" library. Although it definitely goes against the grain at iStock, I could see SS, DT and particulary FT being interested.

Good luck!

I would think that any site's offer would only take into account income from sales on that site.  An individual would base their offer on income from all sites the portfolio appears on.   Should mean a substantially lower offer from a site than an individual.

fred

Welll I am really small stuff there (217 images) but may is already a BME due to two EL's but sales had been picking up for me recently.  What kills me is their review process.  It took me over a year to battle my acceptance rate up to over 60% and now they just rejected 6 in a row that have been accepted and selling well at 4 other sites.   Really am confused over what they want.

c h e e r s
fred

Seems to me they are just trying to protect their copyright like everyone else.  It is certainly ironic though.

fred